The Parks and Recreation Advisory Board gathered on July 9, 2025, for what would be board chair Brian Armstrong's final meeting before relocating to the Netherlands for a work assignment. The meeting carried the routine rhythm of municipal business—golf fee adjustments, budget presentations, and policy reviews—but was punctuated by moments that revealed deeper tensions about how Bellingham balances growth, conservation, and community access to public spaces. ## Opening Announcements and Transitions Armstrong opened the meeting with news that would reshape the board's leadership: he had accepted a position with his company in Eindhoven, Netherlands, and would be moving in September for what he described as a "2 to 3 year expat assignment" that would place him "in the heart of Cyclocross." The announcement carried both excitement and uncertainty—his oldest daughter was headed to university in Colorado, and the family would be navigating an international transition while maintaining their Bellingham roots. "It's been awesome working with you all on this," Armstrong reflected. "It's been a long time." The comment carried weight beyond politeness; Armstrong had reapplied for his board position despite the move, fingers crossed for reappointment upon his eventual return. The meeting also featured passionate public comment from Brian Armstrong—a different Brian Armstrong, this one a park steward at Squalicum Creek Park. The steward delivered pointed remarks about the loss of AmeriCorps funding that had supported two positions facilitating volunteer work parties and environmental education. "When I see that these positions are being cut, I start to wonder, well, how are we gonna facilitate the program going forward?" he asked, noting that over 150 volunteer applications remained unprocessed due to staff shortages. His testimony painted a picture of untapped community energy: "If you think 150 people that are applying, and then there's 50 more of us that actually are park stewards, that's 200 people. If we only did 5 hours a month... that would be 1,000 hours of service, but I mean, I've done times anywhere from 60 to 100 hours in a month." He challenged the board and staff to reconsider budget priorities that could support volunteer coordination, arguing the investment would yield far more than the cost in both conservation work and community building. ## Golf Course Fee Adjustments: Finding Balance The board's first formal business item demonstrated how even modest fee increases require careful calibration of competing interests. Staff proposed raising the capital reinvestment surcharge at Lake Padden Golf Course from $4 to $5 per round, generating additional funds for the aging irrigation system that keeps the course playable. Operations Manager Steve presented the proposal matter-of-factly: "We found out that most of the golfers are receptive to this surcharge, knowing that it's going to be dedicated to the irrigation system which is like the lifeblood of the course." But board members quickly pushed for a more aggressive approach. Board member Jed had previously suggested a $2 increase rather than $1, which would double the revenue stream. The discussion revealed careful attention to different user groups. When the possibility of applying increases to junior golfers arose, there was immediate concern. "I've seen so many juniors out there because the cost is so reasonable," one board member noted, worried that a $3 increase on a $19 junior rate would represent a disproportionate burden. The conversation grew more complex when disc golf entered the picture. Those users had complained about the original surcharge, and board members questioned whether disc golfers should contribute to traditional golf course irrigation that doesn't benefit their sport. "The enthusiasm for irrigation probably is not necessarily as high amongst the disc golfers," one member observed, noting the post-apocalyptic landscape of the disc golf course areas. "It does not need to be green to play disc golf." After deliberation, the board crafted a nuanced recommendation: a $2 increase for adult golfers, $1 increase for juniors, and no increase for disc golf fees. The motion passed unanimously, reflecting a careful balance of revenue needs, user equity, and practical recognition that different recreation activities have different facility requirements. ## Parks Recreation and Open Space Plan: Data-Driven Decision Making Lane Otter from the Parks Department delivered an extensive presentation on the upcoming update to the city's Parks, Recreation and Open Space Plan—the 20-year planning document that guides virtually every decision the department makes. What emerged was a picture of a department increasingly sophisticated in its use of data and equity analysis, while grappling with the challenges of a growing, urbanizing city. Otter walked the board through several significant changes in approach since the last update in 2019-2020. The new 10-year Greenways levy provided different funding allocations, including a new climate resiliency category. More significantly, the department was applying "a lot more of an equity lens" to all its work, examining the geographic distribution of recreational facilities across the city and ensuring various types of amenities were distributed fairly. The equity analysis relied on sophisticated tools developed by the city's planning department. "They use socioeconomic, household composition and disability, racial and ethnic minority status, and housing type and transportation," Otter explained. "Those four kind of go into a combined social vulnerability index." This index, scored from 0 to 1 by census block, allowed staff to overlay proposed projects and see how they would serve vulnerable populations. Perhaps most intriguing was the department's new access to Placer AI data—cell phone location services that reveal actual park usage patterns. The data confirmed some assumptions while revealing surprises. Lake Padden, Boulevard Park, and Whatcom Falls topped the community park usage lists as expected, but the neighborhood park rankings showed interesting patterns. Elizabeth Park's high usage might be explained by its dense urban location and event programming, while Island Heights Park on Alabama Hill barely registered visitors, leading to speculation about access, awareness, or cell phone dead zones. "It's a little big brother, but you know it's awesome," admitted one board member, capturing the ambivalence many feel about such detailed tracking capabilities. Staff noted the data's limitations—it doesn't capture children who don't carry phones, or people who leave devices behind for neighborhood walks—but acknowledged its value for understanding usage patterns and seasonal fluctuations. ## Trail Planning: Complexity, Equity, and Cost The most sophisticated element of the new planning approach involved trail prioritization. Staff had analyzed 280 individual trail segments in the city's recommended trails layer, grouping them into 60 project areas and ranking them using three criteria: complexity (wetlands, critical areas, steep slopes, landmark trees, stream crossings), actionability (does the city own the property and have necessary rights), and equity (using the social vulnerability index). The analysis produced a ranked list of trail projects, with the top 10 highlighted in hot pink on planning maps. What struck board members was that the city was already actively working on five or six of the top 10 projects. "In some ways some of this isn't that new, because we intuitively, and just by the work we do every day, we kind of know what these are," Otter acknowledged, "but it was neat to see that the data in some ways confirmed what we're being right." The equity component explained why projects like the Samish Crest trail ranked high despite other challenges—they served areas with gaps in the current level of service. The analysis provided a framework for budget decisions: "Maybe we pick one of these big, expensive trails to get into the budget every other year," Otter suggested, acknowledging that some equity-critical projects could cost $1-2 million due to their complexity. ## Conservation vs. Preservation: A Philosophical Divide The presentation of the Parks and Recreation chapter of the city's comprehensive plan sparked an unexpected but illuminating debate about language and philosophy. Planning staff had changed "preservation" to "conservation" in describing the city's approach to natural areas, a change that Parks Director Nicole strongly advocated. "This is like my sword that I'll die on," she declared. "They're different. They're different things. Conservation and preservation are very different. We provide public access. We want people to connect. We want to manage our natural resources sustainably, but we don't fence things and preserve and keep people out. We do conservation." Her distinction drew on the historical debate between preservationist John Muir and conservationist Gifford Pinchot: preservation implies keeping areas pristine and untouched, while conservation means managing resources sustainably for human use. In the urban context, this distinction carries practical implications for trail access, environmental education, and restoration work. Board members probed the distinction, with some associating conservation with "don't use it, conserve water, conserve this," while others connected preservation with historic buildings rather than natural areas. The discussion revealed how seemingly simple word choices reflect deeper philosophical differences about the purpose of urban open space. Nicole explained the practical stakes: "Some of the efforts to restore, do restoration within park property has also ended up trying to remove access. And so we're trying to... we end up kind of in an uphill battle sometimes with keeping even what we have." The department found itself defending public access while also conducting habitat restoration, creating tensions between environmental protection and recreational use. The conversation extended to unauthorized trail building, a growing challenge as the city densifies. "If you don't put a trail that people can use, they're going to build one they shouldn't," Nicole noted. Staff described elaborate trail obliteration efforts that proved futile: "We take all afternoon and move every single piece of downwood and everything, and the next day you would never know that they were there. It's wide open again if people want to go through." ## Policy Language and Community Culture Board members pressed for changes to policy language that would emphasize education and encouragement over rules and enforcement. Rather than simply "clearly establish rules for use" on trails, they advocated for language about "educate and encourage following park rules." "If you encourage people, say, let's all take care of this trail together, they're more likely to do it than if you say, 'don't, no garbage,'" argued one board member. "It's a presentation, and... the more we get that bike culture and a walking culture to share the trail culture and respect our environment culture, I just think that's... and that we're a bigger city, and we're gonna have a lot more people on these trails than we ever did, and we all have to kind of accommodate a little bit culture." The sentiment reflected broader questions about how a growing city maintains community norms and shared stewardship. Rather than relying on rules that can't be effectively enforced, the board pushed for approaches that build cultural understanding and cooperation among diverse trail users. ## Budget Pressures and Creative Solutions Parks Director Holly Gilbert's budget presentation revealed a department under significant financial pressure, tasked with finding ways to reduce general fund expenses by 5% and 10% for the 2026 budget. The proposed savings demonstrated both creativity and the painful choices facing city services. Some solutions involved better cost accounting—accurately representing administrative costs for capital projects, moving fleet rentals for Greenways-funded staff to the Greenways budget, and being more realistic about part-time position budgets. "Sometimes we budget things, but it's not really a realistic number," Gilbert explained, citing sports officials who might work only a couple weeks each summer but were budgeted for much more. Other proposals involved direct service cuts. The 10% scenario included eliminating the Boulevard Beach lifeguard program, which costs about $80,000 annually and "was never funded" but had been absorbed by the department. Staff also proposed cutting irrigation in some parks, adding credit card surcharges to online transactions, and increasing facility rental fees. More creative revenue generation included plans for a boat launch fee at Bloedel Donovan Park, targeting trailer parking rather than hand-launched kayaks. The department was also projecting higher revenue from recent fee increases at other facilities. The discussion of AmeriCorps positions revealed the complexity of replacing federal funding. The cost of two AmeriCorps positions approximately equaled one nine-month seasonal employee, but Gilbert expressed doubt about maintaining the full scope of environmental education programming. "I'm not convinced that we're going to be able to continue to do school stewardship," she said, noting letters of concern already arriving from teachers. The budget conversation highlighted the challenge of maintaining service levels while managing inflation in construction costs that had increased 150-200% for some projects. Every decision involved trade-offs between maintaining current services and investing in future needs. ## Community Engagement and Infrastructure Reality Gilbert's report on upcoming projects revealed the careful coordination required for major park development. The East Bakerview Park master plan kickoff was scheduled for July 17 at Bellingham Covenant Church, but the project faced complex community communication challenges. "We have been getting quite a few inquiries about the housing part of this project," Gilbert explained. "Some concerns from folks about why Parks is selling property for housing and building housing." The questions reflected misunderstanding about a City Council directive to evaluate parceling off land for affordable housing as part of making the park development financially feasible. "I got one question that was like, 'Are you making money off affordable housing by selling property?'" Gilbert said with apparent exasperation. "No. I wish. But no, we're not. We're not making any money." The proceeds would help fund essential infrastructure including fish-passable culverts and utilities needed to develop the park. The 100 Acre Wood project exemplified the challenges of urban park development. Phase 2 construction came in $100,000 over the engineer's estimate, bringing total project investment to $1.2 million for trail restoration, habitat work, and infrastructure. Permitting had taken longer than expected, with some requirements that seemed to misunderstand the project's conservation goals. "This was another example of... we're fixing things, we're restoring things, we're narrowing trails," Gilbert explained, but permit conditions sometimes reflected lessons from problematic developments elsewhere that didn't apply to the city's restoration work. The project required careful negotiation to avoid requirements that would have contradicted the approved master plan. ## Looking Ahead: Planning Timelines and Board Leadership The meeting concluded with planning for both short-term logistics and longer-term governance. With the board chair's departure imminent, members decided to skip the August meeting and address leadership transitions in September. Several board members noted their terms were expiring in August, with reappointment applications pending. The Parks and Recreation chapter of the comprehensive plan would go out for public comment in September, following release of the Environmental Impact Statement. The full Parks, Recreation and Open Space Plan update would continue through fall, with a February deadline for state funding eligibility. As the meeting wound down, the conversation turned briefly to community events—the Birchwood International Market on August 10, complete with neighborhood yard sales—a reminder that beneath all the policy discussions and budget constraints, parks and recreation services exist to strengthen community connections and provide spaces for neighbors to gather. The July meeting captured a department and board wrestling with fundamental questions about growth, equity, conservation, and community access. While the specific decisions—golf fees, policy language, budget cuts—might seem routine, they reflected deeper challenges facing cities throughout the Pacific Northwest: how to maintain livability and community character while accommodating growth, how to balance environmental protection with public access, and how to fund essential services in an era of constrained resources. Armstrong's pending departure to Europe provided an apt metaphor for the broader themes of the meeting—transitions, new perspectives, and the ongoing challenge of maintaining community commitments across changing circumstances. Whether discussing trail conservation or budget pressures, the board's work demonstrated the careful balancing act required to steward public resources in a dynamic, growing city.